US Republicans tell lies about the NHS

[Balthazar]

Originally Posted by Philidor

Another reason why the NHS is so popular relates to how it was born. The men returning from WW2 (and the women who ran the factories/farms in their absence) voted it in. So to attack the NHS is to attack our war heroes who prevailed against European fascism. People get very emotional about it. I certainly do.

It's a huge shame returning GIs didn't insist on a new social contract in post-war America. Returning, victorious, armies scare the sh*t out of civilian governments. They basically get whatever they ask for. Ironic that the NHS was established with a US loan!

Good point. The Americans who helped defeat Hitler came home to all-American fascism, complete with work-ethic religiosity, consumerist conformism, nationalistic delusion, and racial discrimination. By the 50's, anti-communist paranoia had purged the unions of radicals and created a generation of docile, gas-guzzling suburbanites who considered dissent unpatriotic.

[Chi_town/Philly]

I found this post useful-

Originally Posted by Balthazar

The Americans who helped defeat Hitler came home to all-American fascism, complete with work-ethic religiosity, consumerist conformism, nationalistic delusion, and racial discrimination.

This dystopic view of America (a view not shared by the overwhelming majority of GIs who came back home after their eyewitness encounters with inarguable fascism, nor, I daresay, with the vast preponderence of people who actually lived through this period) is significant for illustrative purposes. Those who have this perspective can view Obama as a Centrist, and maintain that viewpoint in all sincerity and earnestness.

It's kind of like Dan Rather's well-travelled comment that he found the editorial policy of the New York Times to be "down-the-middle."

To use a metaphor Scott (both of 'em) would understand, when someone like Dan Rather is stationed in the trapezoid and his field-of-vision just barely reaches the Red Line, the Blue Line looks like Center-Ice, to him!

[Chi_town/Philly]

Originally Posted by Florestan

Conservatives want services to be cut for those other people over there (who are probably lazy scroungers, immigrants, homos, commies etc) but not for themselves.

Looking past the proxy demonization (again, :sigh: )- There is a fairly general prescription for the arrest of government spending (based on the ol' 'when you find yourself in a hole, first, stop digging' principle)- it's called the Balanced Budget Amendment.

I'm sure I don't have to tell present company that its proponents are fairly consistently members of one major party, and its oppenents are similarly members of the other major party, do I??

It should contain a rational exception or two, e.g.: if Congress declares war (it hasn't sone so since 1941). Funny thing is- the Left can leverage the purse-power of this sensible restraint just as easily as the Right. Example: say you want to pursue open-ended military action in Iraq- then you would have to either a) Convince Congress to Declare War, b) Legislate a Tax Increase (and suffer all the political fall-out from that one), and/or c) Decide Where to Cut Elsewhere in the Budget (and suffer the political fall-out from the shorted programs).

Contrarily, if "Bailouts," "Stimulus," or the nearly complete reversal of the Welfare Reform Act were underwritten through tax increases and/or slashing of other government spending rather than a casual raising of the debt-ceiling by only a few more Trillion Dollars, that could have its own political fall-out, as well.

[Balthazar]

Originally Posted by Chi_town/Philly

Those who have this perspective can view Obama as a Centrist, and maintain that viewpoint in all sincerity and earnestness.

Now this is an ad hominem: simply because I happen to be critical of the racial segregation and McCarthyism prevalent in 1950's America, my assertion that Obama is a centrist must be false.

Anyone who sees the Clinton cronies like Larry Summers who now staff the Treasury; who notices the reluctance of the Obama administration to break up, reregulate, or nationalize the banks who created the financial meltdown; or sees the desperate attempts by the current administration to keep capitalism-as-usual afloat, should be realistic enough to conclude that Obama is far from the progressive that his critics make him out to be.

[Zeitblom]

Now here's the voice of scientific rationality - Rush Limbaugh claims the Icelandic volcano is God's response to Obama's healthcare reforms:

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/17/limbaugh-volcano/

[Philidor]

Originally Posted by Zeitblom

Now here's the voice of scientific rationality - Rush Limbaugh claims the Icelandic volcano is God's response to Obama's healthcare reforms:

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/17/limbaugh-volcano/

Which reinforces my argument that Justin Bieber, and possibly George Osborne, should be sacrificed to appease the volcano.